Blog Terrorists
Please be aware that a few Blog terrorist trolls try to impersonate other Bloggers here and
vomit up slander, lies, and sometimes even pornographic images. Report all abuses to Blogger when you see them, as we will.
People
like Andrew, Frank Walton and Daddy Cool are all banned from DC for these reasons. They repeatedly comment here anyway and
I have no way to stop them. Either ask them to cough up the evidence for their claims, or ignore them entirely.
Well...isn't that just precious? First of all, I don't know why a pervert like
John even makes it out that pornography bothers him in the least. Now, I can't condemn a person for testing the waters and
visiting a strip club on occasion, but the fact of the matter is that DJ was MARRIED when he got involved
with Linda, his pastime lover.Shouldn't that mean something? If DJ had the gaul to go out and explore a new set of boundaries,
why not undo the binding contract? Certaintly it's allot easier than going through all of the explanatory trouble and then
having your spouse feel worthless and inadequate while you are trying to justify yourself? There's no reason to sympathize
for a mop like John W. Loftus folks, because he's pathetic slime. People like John will simply toss their moral values in
the air and then expect that religion will come and save the day, and, when there are still people intelligent enough to call
him out on their bluffing and that religion will not suffice in their excuses, then they abadon it. And that's why you have
John doing what he does. He's a two-faced hypocritical self-centered egotistical liar. There's proof he's all of those things, in fact.
Popular college-level internet apologists such as Frank Walton get John's mentioning
in the list of names "banned" from the blog. I suspect this stems from a distant past when I would post comments on DJ's blog
using my parody alias "John W. Locust", which John interpreted as an alias belonging to Walton. It does not seem inconsistent
of John for him to ignore the fact that this has been addressed and brought to his attention (i.e,, that my
alias is not maintained under Frank Walton), and bring it up once more due to his delusional paranoia, which seems to be common
with allot of Holding dissenters these days. John just isn't willing to believe anyone, even if they confess to being the
true identity behind a blogger account (in which John W. Locust has been banned along with all of its comments,
and, to my knowledge, NOT FRANK WALTON, as John probably believes) and explain why. Of course, John is a godawful liar who
can't even strategize a well formulated plan with deceiving people and getting away with it. C'mon, John, this is the internet,
surely lying can't be that difficult, can it?
What gets to me here though is not the fact that John is trying to express some
sort of revolting digust with pornography (which we all know is probably a bunch of fooey to begin with), or that he still
associates the wrong people to the wrong blogger accounts and identities, but that he has developed a knack for reporting
"abuses." I of course, don't buy into this. Let's take a last gander at what the very last snippit of this blurb notice reads
to find out: "Either ask them to cough up the evidence for their claims, or ignore them entirely." Well, ain't that
a bitch.
So now we already see the true intent behind this notice: John thinks it's clearly
a matter of justifying yourself with the presence of "evidence." What his small puny brain doesn't seem to conceal well enough
is that he wants individuals who are unable to make a substantiative case for themselves be flagged off Blogger. It's no surprise
that John is an immoral, irresponsible prick, but this takes the cake. If this was merely an issue of ignoring someone, why
does he insist that the Blogger administrators take care of them? First it becomes an issue of abusing the system, and now
it becomes an issue of who is the better debator. Does John suspect that his opposition base their actions on irrational
motives? I don't know about you, but when it comes to the line of irrational behaviors, John goes beyond what most of
his critics are capable of.
I can't speak for everyone on behalf of my blog staff, but I know that most
of us live in a free democratic society known formally as the United States of America. As American citizens, we have the
right to express our opinions and thoughts, even if it offends people. Is John Loftus trying to censor free speech
all on a matter of whether or not someone can provide "evidence" for their claims? It's not as though John is actually concerned
with the abuses in commentary and tone (and for someone like Loftus, just what exactly does he consider to be libel and deceptive?),
that's easy enough to understand. No...this seems like Loftus clearly wants his own little corner to pout his trumpet. Anyone
getting in the way of doing this should be expunged from the community altogether. How else does one explain the viciousness
that comes from John's posts? Call him out on his erring, and you're likely to hear the following: "Blah, blah, blah...idiot.",
"Shut up, you idiot!", and so on.
While John did not make any mention of my blog, I have no reason to doubt that
it's included in his list of potential censorship targets, mostly because our DC version consists of "impersonator Bloggers".
In fact, impersonations are our primary blogging philosophy, in the non-harmful sense. That doesn't stop John from taking
this the wrong way, or making it seem as if the blog is intended to give out false information that could bring harm into
his personal life. "Yes, John! Our blog is intended to give out your phone number and home address to professional hitmen
so they can take your ass out once and for all!"
This is a clear indicator that a massive war, which seeks to clash heads between
my opponent and I, will commence in light of these events. A "War of the Blogs" will take place. Yes, there is going
to be some serious action taking place, and the result will be ugly and gruesome. A heavy dose of mockery and ridicule will
be involved. Whatever side you think will be victorious in this match is entirely up to you. Unlike Debunking Christianity,
I and my fellow TWeb comrades cannot force you into taking sides with anyone, or believe in anything. No, this is a challenge.
It is a contest. I've been called out into the open and must answer it. The victory is undecided, the outcome is unpredictable.
Only you as a spectator will rightfully judge who deserves the crown of glory. The only thing that can be determined, above
all else, is this simple phrase:
THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!
